Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: If Melkor could not create?

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > The Silmarillion > If Melkor could not create?   
Tauron began this thread with the following question.

Quote:
Then where the heck did those dragons came from. I thought it was somewhere in the Silmarillion saying that he created them i dunno for sure though could be wrong?


Valedhelgwath replied

Glaurung, the first of the fire drakes was known among other names as the Father of Dragons and the Worm of Morgoth. He was raised from young by Morgoth, and it is easy to come away from the Silmarillion with the impression that Morgoth created the Dragons. Nowhere in the Silmarillion does it actually say that Morgoth created the dragons, however. In places it does mention things like Ancalagon being the first of his winged dragons etc, but again I dispute Morgoth is responsible for their creation.

What I am getting at is the difference between creation and selective breeding. Without a doubt Morgoth was responsible for the appearence in Middle Earth of certain breeds of dragons. He would have done this, however, by a slow process of selective breeding rather than a process of creation. To better understand this, look at farmers or dog breeders who manage to breed an entirely new breed of cattle or dog. Okay they have created something never seen before, but they have bred these animals, not created them.

So, Morgoth could not create life himself, but by whatever foul means he used, he could breed new species from old ones. We can see this with his "creation" of orcs from elves, and again possibly with Trolls from Ents. So the question, as you mentioned, really is, "where the heck did dragons come from?"

JEA Tyler suggests in her Complete Tolkien Companion...

Quote:
It is possible that the race of Dragon-kind was not originally evil but lured into evil ways by Morgoth the Enemy far back in the Elder Days, though other theories say they were in fact demonic powers of the same order as the Balrogs, Maiar in the service of the self-styled Lord of Middle Earth.


Personally I favour this view of Dragons being Maian spirits too. The Maiar took many shapes and forms, and their powers varied greatly from one to another. At the will of Manwe, Maian spirits became the Giant Eagles, while at Yavanna's bidding, other Maian spirits became Ents. In a similar way, I believe, some of the followers of Melkor could have become Dragons.

I am of this opinion mainly because the dragons are very intelligent. They are obviously "thinking" beings as opposed to the beasts Yavanna was capable of creating (Yavanna being able to create life, but like the rest of the Valar, banned from creating "thinking" races.)

Failing this, the only alternative I can see, is that Yavanna or one of the other Valar created some prototype Cold Drake species of beast, which Melkor then managed to change as he had the Orcs. After thousands of years of selective breeding, he may finally have managed to breed something that had evolved into the intellegent fire drakes of Glaurung's kin.

Perhaps the truth is somewhere between these two theories, and the intellegent dragons were perhaps Maian spirits that inhabited the bodies of dragon beasts that Melkor had bred for the purpose.

Thanks for your explanation... Then maybe all those great "monsters" are maia spirits.
I think the likes of Draugluin, the father of werewolves, Thuringwethil the vampire, and Huan the hound were all Maiar, as were perhaps the ancestors of Beorn. Others, like the Fell beasts that were mounts for the Nazgul, were more likely to be corruptions of something like the Great Eagles.
Val I liked your explanation.....
I like his explanations too, and he writes so meaningful and effortless, it seems to me. When I try to put an explanation on paper (or the screen) I always stumble over my words never quite getting to where I wanted to go. Val on the other hand almost always hits the mark. Thumbs Up Smilie
Yup!
Val is my new idol Wink Smilie
Careful guys, you'll give me a swell-head Exploding Head Smilie

That was only my interpretation of things too, not necessarily the correct answer. I'd love to know for certain what their true heritage was.
Yeah but I thought it was very highly likely to be so....
Hail to ValedhelgwathBig Smile SmilieBig Smile SmilieBig Smile Smilie
Beorn was a man, BTW. He was a descendant of the Marachian tribes who didn't pass into Eriador or Beleriand and became the Hadorians. The Beornings, the Woodmen and the Rohhirim were also of Marachain descent but the Rohhirm also may have had some Numenorean and Dunlendish blood in them.

I think Tolkien says in his letters that Beorn's powers were due to a good magic, of sorts On Maia mating with incarnates, I think Melian may hae been an exception but in Myths Transformed (HoME 10) Tolkien, says that (early) Orcs were of Beastial and Maiacal form, and later they inter-bred with men, (Tolkein rejected the idea that they were oe Elvish origins, or at least they were only partly Elvish and the idea that Orcs were corrupted Elves was a Eressian loremaster theory anyway.
Maybe I have found something while I was looking into the books:
Dragons simply existed, as is, and were neither bred nor created by Melkor. They simply existed as part of Arda, caused perhaps by the discord Melkor himself introduced into the Ainulindule, and then taken by Melkor as servants; and being (perhaps) an offspring of his prideful desire to create beings of his own--for the very purpose of mastering and bending to his will--they were easily swayed to his side and made willing slaves. This does not require true 'creation' on the part of Melkor, simply the introduction of a discordant theme that is later made into reality, or the 'World that Is', when Eru made the song of the Ainur into Ea.
Quote:
This does not require true 'creation' on the part of Melkor, simply the introduction of a discordant theme that is later made into reality, or the 'World that Is', when Eru made the song of the Ainur into Ea.
But surely, like I suggested, this is the same as the creation of the Ents and the Giant Eagles...

From Aule and Yavanna - The Silmarillion
Quote:
O Kementari, Eru hath spoken saying: "Do then any of the Valar suppose that I did not hear all the Song, even the least sound of the least voice? Behold! When the Children awake, then the thought of Yavanna will awake also, and it will summon spirits from afar, and they will go among the Kelvar and the Olvar, and some will dwell therein, and be held in reverence, and their just anger shall be feared. For a time: while the Firstborn are in their power, and while the Secondborn are young." But dost thou not now remember, Kelmentari, that thy thought sang not always alone? Did not thy thought and mine meet also, so that we took wing together like great birds that soar above the clouds? That also shall come to be by the heed of Iluvatar, and before the Children awake there shall go forth with wings like the wind the Eagles of the Lords of the West."
The way I interpret things, is that the Ainur sang the great music, and then Eru made Ea a reality from that music. The Valar had many followers among the Maiar, both lesser and greater, as did Melkor.

Using their themes sang in the music, Yavanna and Manwe were able to bring about the creation of the Ents and Giant Eagles, but these were not their own creations as it took "spirits summoned from afar" to actually give them life. I assume, that as at this time only Ainur were in existance, these spirits must in fact be lesser Maiar.

In a similar manner Melkor created dragons during his discord within the Great Music. These would come into being when Eru made Ea a reality, but it would similarly take "spirits summoned from afar" to give them life. If these spirits were from Melkor's Maian following, it would also explain why the dragons served him loyally.
Quote:
and Huan the hound were all Maiar


Huan wasn't a Maia. Though in Myths Transformed V Tolkien states he was a Maia, he seemingly rejects this in his final notes/revisions, which is shown here:

Quote:
The same thing may be said of Huan and the Eagles they were taught the language of the Valar and raised to a higher lvel-but had no fea
Myths Transformed; HoME 10

So therefore Huan was not a Ainur who had shape-shifted into a beast.

Quote:
like the Fell beasts that were mounts for the Nazgul, were more likely to be corruptions of something like the Great Eagles.


In early drafts for LoTR, the Fell Beasts often come out as 'corrupted eagle' like beings. Tolkien comments on this here, in early conceeptions of them

Quote:
The Black riders now have taken form of demonic eagles or take (eagle like) vulture beeds as sturds


The Treason of Isengard; Story Forseen From Moria HoME 7

I think that the ability to *corrupt* the is also mentioned in Of Ents and Eagles/Anaxatrion Onyalie (HoME 11)

On Ents:

Quote:
No one knew whence they (Ents) came or first appeared. The High Elves said that the Valar did not mention them in the 'Music'. But some (Galadriel) were [of the] opinion that when Yavanna discovered the mercy of Eru to AulŽ in the matter of the Dwarves, she besought Eru (through ManwŽ) asking him to give life to things made of living things not stone, and that the Ents were either souls sent to inhabit trees, or else that slowly took the likeness of trees owing to their inborn love of trees.
Letters of Tolkien

Remember this is just a theory and Galadriel was of the opinion it was true and one wonders now about her departing words to Treebeard in Many Partings in which she is seemingly talking about meeting him again in what seems to me as re-raised Beleriand. Of course the Fourth Age saw the dwindling of all non-mannish beings, and the Ents couldn't procreate anymore.

Also in Of Eagles and Ents (HoME 11)

Quote:
With the words 'the Ents were either souls sent to inhabit trees' cf. the words of Eru in the text (p. 46): 'When the Children awake, then the thought of Yavanna will awake also, and it will summon spirits from afar, and they will go among the kelvar and the olvar, and some will dwell therein ...' It seems likely enough that the note on the draft letter and the writing of Anaxartaron OnyaliŽ belong to much the same time.


Si it seems that the Ents may have been Ainric beings who were sent by eru to inhabit the trees.












[Edited on 26/5/2003 by Findekano]

I have a theory about that. I think that, like the eagles, the dragons, even as fire-drakes, were actually sacred beasts originally that the Valar created to protect the people of Arda against the darkness. But because of their great power, Morgoth became increasingly interested in turning the dragons to evil. He ended up corrupting thousands of dragons into his service. He corrupted so many that the race itself became somewhat perverted so that even the ones that never joined the dark powers did things the valar didn't have in mind, like using the dragon spell, hoarding treasure, burning cities, invading dwarven mountain kingdoms, and eating men, dragons like Smaug, Scatha, and (if you don't wanna be canon) Urgost.

The reasons why I believe this is the case are:

1. dragons were never described or depicted as being ugly/viscous in appearance (as the Orcs, Goblins, Uruks, Trolls, and Balrogs were) only in action.

2. It's important to note that only in the first age did the dragons serve the dark powers (and if you don't wanna be canon, the second age with the war against the Witch King). No other time did any dragon serve the dark powers, even when there were dark powers to serve. Smaug may have been mean, greedy, and murderous, but he had nothing to do with a dark lord, nor did he demonstrate any real threat to Middle Earth himself. It was all only in his goal to protect his stolen treasure.

Interesting Thejoe. We need to remember however that in Valinor there were and are creatures that we have never seen before and probably never will due to its removal from Earth. Having said that re dragons, the Silmarillion states that the Elves, upon seeing Glaurung for the first time, were astounded by this new thing and Melkor's release of the winged Dragons in the last battle was unlooked for by The Valar. I imagine if Dragons were native to the Earth they would have been recognised.

I imagine that like Sauron did with the Fell Beasts, Melkor selectively bred existing reptiles and used his dark arts and power on them to enable excessive growth and the power of flight, perhaps in defiance and mockery of Manwe's Eagles. I also think that dragons were indeed inhabited by Maia turned evil. They are too intelligent and greedy to have been a natural animal.

I could of course be wrong, but in my mind any sentient being which was able to use speech was either a Child of Illuvatar or Maia.

You might be right. If what your saying is what happened then the breeding must have involved possessing Snakes with Balrogs thus giving the reptiles wings and breath of fire.

Its definitely safe to say that Tolkien based the dragons in middle earth exclusively on the monstrous dragons of Norse and Indo-European myth; definitely not the sacred beasts of eastern, Mexican, and Celtic mythologies.

I agree with you Brego, on maiar possessing the bodies of dragons. They were as powerful as balrogs, and also possess some magic abilities. Since they possessed the bodies, they must be bound to them. This may be why dragons and still breed. The "bloodline" of the maiar must thin out after generation after generation. This explains why some dragons are weaker towards the third and later ages.

I backed this up from the line of Melian. With each generation, the maia blood thins down and they become less powerful.

True The Joe. However in questions like these there is no right or wrong, I believe this is in the mind of the reader and that here on PT we are sharing our thoughts. Interesting re the Balrogs. If I remember correctly somewhere in HOME there is info on Melkor capturing an Eagle to experiment on. Awful I know.

Interesting question.

Firstly, let us not forget werewolves. I believe they were wolves infused with the spirits of maia. So Morgoth took a regular wolf, let a maia take it over, and thus we have a larger more terrifying version of a wolf. So it seems likely he took maybe a snake, since we know most dragons were long and worm like, and commanded the maia who he allowed to become his greatest weapon to have things such as wings or fire breath. And of course this would also explain their intelligence.

That can be seen with trolls. If dragons were cross breeds of other animals, even if taken from something wise like an ent, then perhaps they could acquire simple speech like the trolls from the Hobbit, but they would never be the most intelligent, cunning, ruthless, and greedy creatures ME has ever known. So I don't think it makes sense that they were two individual animals, but rather one that was given great power.

Also if they were just a simple animal, I don't think Sauron would've had any trouble recruiting them in the 2nd or 3rd ages, as he'd just have to entice them with food or use his power of influence over other animals like wargs, nazgul, and werewolves who supposedly still existed into the 3rd age. Instead they were intelligent enough to have their own plans and worries and didn't think Sauron was worthy of their talents because he was just another Maia, whereas Morgoth was a Vala. Not to mention each one was incredibly well spoken.

My 2 cents....

Well of course its awful Brego, but he's the dark lord. What do you expect?! And you're right that there is no right answer about it. The middle earth saga is a work of art and I always say that when it comes to art you can't be wrong.

To true Brogs and TJoe and the genius of Tolkien only gives us enough info to infer true horror.  He leaves it to each reader to use his or her mind to conjure just the right amount of awfulness, yet not enough to put them off.

Dont forget that as Galin pointed out in one of his series of quotes on another thread, Tolkien once stated that the Maia chose mostly animal forms to inhabit when in visible form, this then perhaps means that if they willed they could enlarge or re form these animals due to their mood or temper. 

So a Maia of fire in the service of Melkor becomes a Balrog, where as a Fire Spirit on the side of the Valar is as Arien, who guides the Sun.  A maia in Hound shape like Huan, when on the Dark side becomes a ravenous Warg or Werewolf.  We know that Sauron had the power to change from Wolf to Serpent to Monster and back to himself and even to appear Elf like and beautiful if he wished.  So perhaps each Maia had a certain amount of strength from the beginning and being lent or given power or perhpa even through learning and their deeds over eons they could grow or diminish.

Also we are discounting dinosaurs which Melkor would have known during the creation of Arda.  He probably wiped them all out and kept a few to play with.... lol

Yes that's very true about Tolkien. He was a very geniused author. He may have been a college professor at Oxford but I bet whenever he taught his students about mythology he was really thinking to himself "What new stories should I write" or "What new races of beings should I create" or "What should happen next in the Hobbit/the Lord of the Rings/the Silmarillion

My Dad is also a huge Tolkien fan and even got me into Middle Earth and he just came up with a theory of his own theory of the dragons of Middle Earth, listen to this:

You know the Cold-Drakes, the lesser dragons mentioned only fleetingly in Tolkien's books? What if those were the original dragons, created by Yavanna to be just normal animals. They certainly seemed like just animals. They couldn't breathe fire, and probably couldn't talk or use the dragon spell. Morgoth probably did use them but only to breed the Uruloki. I think that THEY, the fire-drakes, WERE bred by Morgoth by bring Cold-Drakes into Angband, probably from the Northern Waste where they may have lived and then possessing those dragons with Balrogs. That's how fire-drakes like Smaug and Glaurung were more intelligent and could use the "dragon spell" because they were possessed by Maiar as wicked as the dark lord himself. And because the balrogs were fire demons, that's also how these dragons grew able to breathe fire, as a result of the possession.

So to sum it all up, the dragons may have indeed been among those animals created by Yavanna but the Uruloki were bred in mockery of dragons, just as Orcs were of Elves, Trolls of Trees, and possibly Goblins of Dwarves.

I like that theory TheJoe.

Yeah it makes sense right? Because very little is known about the cold-drakes except that they didn't have all the power, and therefore all the evil, Morgoth put into the ones that became fire-drakes. They may have been just normal beasts of Yavanna. The dark lord did something very similar with the Wolves. He created the werewolves by possessing normal wolves of Yavanna with some type of fallen Maiar.

I think Melkor would be able to create things, as long as the things he created would be compliant with Eru's plans. It was said that he had a lot of abilities and maybe would be the most powerful among the Ainur. When he discarded Eru's vision and decided he wants to take his place and rule the Universe himself, he lost the ability to create.

I found in Silmarillion a perfect quote for it.

To corrupt or destroy whatsoever arose new and fair was ever the chief desire of Morgoth; and doubtless he had this purpose also in his errand: by fear and lies to make Men the foes of the Eldar, and bring them up out of the east against Beleriand. (Silmarillion, Chapter 17, "Of the Coming of Men into the West")

It sums up perfectly what I think. Everything Melkor could do was to take what was already created (all things that existed were good and pure at the beginning) and alter it by his manipulations, treasons, lies and tortures. He needed to do it to have the power over things, so he would use them in his plans, because he wasn't able to create things that could be useful for him from the beginning. We can talk now about Melkor creating things such as chaos or war, because he was basically the reason they existed, but I believe those things came from Eru. I suppose those things existed in Eru's mind before Melkor use them. I mean - those things existed in a void - they weren't brought to life before Melkor used them. The term 'void' really fits there because chaos is a lack of order, war is a lack of peace, etc. Melkor hated peace because he had to find a way to achieve power, therefore by battling against Eru's creations he brought war to Arda. That's how I see it.

EDIT: as I think about it more - isn't the ability to create the exact opposite of taking something away? I mean - the war is when you take the peace away. The death is a lack of life. This is what Melkor was able to do - to take away the good things, not to create evil things.

Interesting ideas Indis. Now be aware, a random thought appeared and this paragraph is completely separate and a more philosophical topic, so skip ahead if you want. But a few thoughts came to mind when reading your examples and, though they make enough sense, are a bit too black and white for scenarios like this IMO. Does the lack of chaos truly create peace? Assuming war is chaos, and peace follows war, and war is inevitably going to return, which will then be followed again by peace, would then suggest chaos creates peace, conversely meaning peace creates war, and in the long run meaning chaos causes war no more than peace and order. Having said that, chaos is indeed caused by a lack of order, which is undoubtedly resolved through peace...but the question is, do they "create each other?"  Kind of a crude example, and I hope it gets my point across, but perhaps think of it more like....siblings. Sure they came from their well rounded Christian parents, but then they were introduced to sin, which lead them to do something bad, though they weren't necessarily bad people, and so they continue on being good until miscellaneous temptation arises, which causes them to do something bad, yet they go on being good the next day. Point being, good does not necessarily lead to bad so how can bad then lead to good? Peace does not lead to chaos, so how can chaos lead to peace? War does not simply end and peace does not simply begin. They are both results of each other, and of course the 3,000,000 other factors in between.

Now, translating this into the origins of dragons. I don't believe Melkor had the ability to "take away" good so much as "bring evil" to good things, thus we have the truest definition of corruption. And please don't take this the wrong way! Love reading your thoughts and I equally like your theories, just having some fun here....

On the note of Joe's theory...I agree for the most part. Balrogs mixed with cold drakes makes enough sense. However, why then would they resist Sauron's call for allies during the 2nd age? All of his other servants by his side were also corruptions by Morgoth, so what caused the civil war? He was a general of theirs during the 1st age. So after their leader dies, all of his most loyal servants just turned on each other?? But....why? Why are dragons and balrogs so disinterested in helping their master's most trusted, and evil, servant? Especially since Sauron in the 2nd age may have been even more powerful than Morgoth at the end of the 1st. However we have a few examples of maia who, after suddenly being "on their own," pretty much cut off contact with everyone for good.

A few other random thoughts that are throwing me away from the balrog/cold drake theory for no specific reason: dragons could breed on their own, whereas we have no record of balrogs doing this (I don't think). Not all dragons had wings. And I'm pretty sure the first few dragons, the Uruloki, didn't have wings and were just fire drakes (correct me if I'm wrong). Just seems unusual that one of the most notable features of dragons, which supposedly came from their winged balrog father so to speak (assuming Balrogs do in fact have wings and they were passed on to dragons) would be missing in the first generation. Also fire drakes are called so because they can breathe fire, so what about cold drakes? Can they breathe ice? Probably not. So they inherited fire breathing but not wings, which all dragons had later? Perhaps later dragons bred with eagles or something...

Ok I know all of this is random and incredibly subjective! Mostly just miscellaneous thoughts that appeared as I was reading the thread. Proceed...

But a few thoughts came to mind when reading your examples and, though they make enough sense, are a bit too black and white for scenarios like this IMO.

I knew somebody's going to ask about that. I believe in the very beginning, just before the Music of Ainur it was like that - white or black, good or - lack of good. Eru is portrayed as the ultimate good, and all the things that ever existed or will exist are coming from him. Therefore the idea of war, sickness, chaos are also coming from him - he knew those things will exist - or maybe I should write 'will happen' because of Melkor's activity. If we assume that Eru Iluvatar is the essence of good, we can't say he created things like 'war' - he imagined himself 'peace' on Arda, and therefore he created two different states - peace and the lack of peace. Like in a binary code, when there are two variants of the same thing - 'peace'. Imagine yourself that there's not only peace, but also a joy, freedom, health, wisdom, truth etc. and how many different situations can exist when you take all those things into consideration. All those things were created by Eru, all of them have their places in the reality - it won't be so black and white when you think about all those possibilities.

Does the lack of chaos truly create peace?

No, because in my opinion 'the lack' of something cannot create anything. The void cannot create anything - just like Melkor who was put into the Void, who cannot do anything because there's isn't anything that he could be interacting with. The lack of something has it's own name, just like 'the lack of peace' is called "war", but it isn't a separate thing, that could be created. I see it more as a state, when there's no peace. The states cannot create each other - the happen because of the activity of the living creatures - without them they would be only an ideas of things. Since Eru created peace as a new situation and Melkor with his own actions destroyed this state (changing it to 'lack of peace'Wink Smilie there won't be any other option available - we don't have 'half peace' and 'half war' states. Those things are abstract, and they cannot be divided. Yes, they happen along with any other 'states' , and all of them (seen as a whole only by Eru and possibly Manwe at times) are affecting the reality on Arda. As you said, there's "3,000,000 other factors in between." Change the word "factors" into "states" and I'll agree completely.

Do you know what I mean? Because it's fairly hard to describe, especially in different language Smile Smilie

I remember reading in Silmarillion that the Ainurs didn't really use any language much, because of their ability to read their minds. They didn't need to use many words to name things - wouldn't 'peace' and 'the lack of peace' or 'health' and 'the lack of health' be the most simple way of naming things?

And please don't take this the wrong way! Love reading your thoughts and I equally like your theories, just having some fun here....

No problem at all. I wouldn't be writing all of that if I don't want to discuss it. That what the forums are for, and that's why I'm here Smile Smilie

EDIT: I agree that all our cogitations are incredibly subjective. That's the beauty of it - we were all reading the same books, and everyone's equally entitled to have their own opinions.

Great reading Indis and Balrogs. It's Life's great mystery in both ME and here today. Can thee be War without peace? Can there be Peace without War? Is War part of the Human condition?

Sorry for the delayed reponse!

Well Indis, it looks like we more or less agree completely then. I just interpreted your words differently, but if that was your intent then it makes just as much sense! They do not create each other but are results of one another.

Still a great theory to think on though. Especially when you can now relate it to Middle Earth. Personally I don't question the corruption aspects. I think most things Melkor created that weren't Maia were corruptions. He could not create but he could transform. What's most sinister than taking already created "good" things and turning them into something evil. Seems right up his alley! Definitely more evil to destroy good things than create bad ones IMO.

With dragons, I assume they were maia because of their ability to speak. Wargs did not truly speak IMO. If they did, it would be possible to translate their language to some extent and talk to them. But apparently they spoke their own language and may have picked up a few "words" from orcs, but I don't think it's any different than me saying "Sit! Roll over! Shake! Lay down! Good girl!" We also have no record of cold drakes speaking (I don't think).Trolls, though capable of speech, were most likely corrupted ents, which were most likely either a) CREATED by Eru and given to Yavanna to "grow," meaning they could have been born with speech with no need to acquire it or b) mysteriously came out of nowhere, again meaning they could have speech, like Ungoliant or Tom Bombadil.

Point being we know pretty much all dragons spoke Westron (I guess?) to those who knew it. And pretty much all creatures of ME that could speak were 100% Ainur, not the offspring of one. At least I can't think of any others? They were also able to make decisions for themselves and manage their own alliances. Balrogs more or less stuck with Sauron they just didn't really do anything.  And because of this, they had to be along the same line as other speaking creatures of ME.... Maia.

Another thought just occured...

 

Maybe it's both? Which could explain why some dragons had wings and some were more snake like.

Hm....

In a letter dated 1954, Tolkien noted:

'Of course (...) when you make Trolls speak you are giving them a power, which in our world (probably) connotes the possession of a 'soul'. [letter 153, or Morgoth's Ring, Myths Transformed Text VIII, note 3]

 

But in Morgoth's Ring, in a later text that might be characterized as 'thinking with a pen' perhaps, JRRT yet noted that talking was not necessarily a sign of a rational spirit even -- thus [it would appear] not necessarily an indication of a Maiarin spirit.

'In summary: I think it must be assumed that 'talking' is not necessarily the sign of the possession of a 'rational soul' or fea.' JRRT, Myths Transformed text VIII

In any case, two interesting statements describing Glaurung:

'Then suddenly he spoke by the evil spirit that was in him, saying: 'Hail, son of Húrin. Well met!

And from the Children of Hurin...

'And there right before her was the great head of Glaurung, who had even then crept up from the other side; and before she was aware her eyes had looked into the fell spirit of his eyes, and they were terrible, being filled with the fell spirit of Morgoth, his master.'

Can thee be War without peace? Can there be Peace without War? Is War part of the Human condition?

Well, it is a good question< Brego. I mean - all of them. I believe Peace and War are now tied to each other somehow. In the beginning there was only Peace, but then Melkor 'took it away'. But in the Fourth Age we can assume the Peace was established again. It would mean that yes, the Peace can exist without War but in the 'world of ideas' (as I would call the place the Arda was projected, when the Ainulindale happened) both of those things already exist - they just can't occur on Arda simultaneously.

Well Indis, it looks like we more or less agree completely then. I just interpreted your words differently, but if that was your intent then it makes just as much sense! They do not create each other but are results of one another.

Great! Smile Smilie I was having a hard time describing it.

Still a great theory to think on though. Especially when you can now relate it to Middle Earth. Personally I don't question the corruption aspects. I think most things Melkor created that weren't Maia were corruptions. He could not create but he could transform. What's most sinister than taking already created "good" things and turning them into something evil. Seems right up his alley! Definitely more evil to destroy good things than create bad ones IMO.

Oh, I agree completely with this one, Balrogs!

Of course Indis now the question is WAS there peace in the beginning? Melkor's dischord had taken form by the first barline of Illuvatar's symphony. And because it was part of the same creation, it should be considered as one entity, and not so much the first few notes being considered "peace." Or perhaps it was just a series of chords, so each note was played at the same time like on a piano, and Melkor didn't hesitate to play out of tune. But where was the peace before him?

And what of creatures like Ungoliant? She appeared out of darkness, which is presumably "evil," possibly at the very beginning of time. No creator or master, just pure evil out of nowhere. And let's assume the darkness was somehow considered peace, but at the same time, good creatures were appearing out of nowhere too, which would mean peace led to peace, which seems kind of contradictory in this case, no?

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

I thought I read in the Sil that the eldars thought Ungoliant was one of the corrupted ones but didn't want to serve her master.

 

With peace, the Aniur did sang individually at first but that wasn't part of Eru's theme. But we didn't know how Melkor was singing then.

Of course Indis now the question is WAS there peace in the beginning? (...)

Yes, I believe there was. Simply because all good things have their beginning in Eru. He was there before the Ainurs, he created them. He was the one who planted the idea of Arda in their minds and let them create their own interpretations of his it - of his will. That's why I think all of the Ainurs were able to create - because their projections were united with Eru's plan. And Melkor's vision weren't, so they weren't supposed to materialize - therefore he needed to take away what was already created.

J.R.R. Tolkien - Silmarillion, "On the Darkening of Valinor":
There, beneath the sheer walls of the mountains and the cold dark sea, the shadows were deepest and thickest in the world; and there in Avathar, secret and unknown, Ungoliant had made her abode. The Eldar knew not whence she came; but some have said that in ages long before she descended from the darkness that lies about Arda, when Melkor first looked down in envy upon the Kingdom of Manwe, and that in the beginning she was one of those that he corrupted to his service. But she had disowned her Master, desiring to be mistress of her own lust, taking all things to herself to feed her emptiness; e, for their vigilance had ever been to the north, and the south was long unheeded. Thence she had crept towards the light of the Blessed Realm; for she hungered for light and hated it.

I agree with Glorfindel here - and it is also suggested in the quote above. She appeared out of darkness, but I don't think that the darkness was evil at first - mysterious and unknown, yes - but not evil. It was in the Void before the Arda was created, or maybe I shall say that it was the Void. It was like a blank card, tabula rasa - there wasn't anything written on it - neither good nor evil. It was there before the Great Music. I'd say that Ungoliant was hungry at first (which was presumably a natural thing for all the living creatures), but after Melkor decided to use her against the Vala the hunger became 'unhealthy' and turned into the greed.

And let's assume the darkness was somehow considered peace, but at the same time, good creatures were appearing out of nowhere too, which would mean peace led to peace, which seems kind of contradictory in this case, no?

I would say that there wouldn't be peace from the moment Melkor decided to sang against the harmony of the Great Music.